WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge on Friday blocked a White House executive order targeting an elite law firm, dealing a setback to President Donald Trump’s campaign of retribution against the legal profession.
U.S. District Beryl Howell said the executive order against the firm of Perkins Coie amounted to “unconstitutional retaliation” as she ordered that it be immediately nullified and that the Trump administration halt any enforcement of it.
“No American President," Howell wrote in her 102-page order, "has ever before issued executive orders like the one at issue in this lawsuit targeting a prominent law firm with adverse actions to be executed by all Executive branch agencies but, in purpose and effect, this action draws from a playbook as old as Shakespeare, who penned the phrase: ‘The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.’”
The ruling was most definitive rejection to date of Trump's spate of similarly worded executive orders against some of the country's most elite law firms, part of a broader effort by the president to reshape American civil society by targeting perceived adversaries in hopes of extracting concessions from them and bending them to his will. Several of the firms singled out for sanction have either done legal work that Trump has opposed, or currently have or previously had associations with prosecutors who at one point investigated the president.
The edicts have ordered that the security clearances of attorneys at the targeted firms be suspended, that federal contracts be terminated and that their employees be barred from federal buildings. The punished law firms have called the executive orders an affront to the legal system at odds with the foundational principle that lawyers should be free to represent whomever they'd like.
In the case of Perkins Coie, the White House cited its representation of Democrat Hillary Clinton’s campaign during the 2016 presidential race. Trump has also railed against one of the firm's former lawyers, Marc Elias, who engaged the services of an opposition research firm that in turn hired a former British spy who produced files of research examining potential ties between Trump and Russia. Elias left the firm 2021.
In her opinion, Howell wrote that Perkins Coie was targeted because the firm “expressed support for employment policies the President does not like, represented clients the President does not like, represented clients seeking litigation results the President does not like, and represented clients challenging some of the President’s actions, which he also does not like.”
“That,” she wrote, “is unconstitutional retaliation and viewpoint discrimination, plain and simple.”
The decision was not surprising given that Howell had earlier temporarily blocked multiple provisions of the order and had expressed deep misgivings about the edict at a more recent hearing, when she grilled a Justice Department lawyer who was tasked with justifying it.
The other law firms that have challenged orders against them —WilmerHale, Jenner & Block and Susman Godfrey — have succeeded in at least temporarily blocking the orders. But other major firms have sought to avert orders by preemptively reaching settlements that require them, among other things, to dedicate tens of millions of dollars in free legal services in support of causes the Trump administration says it supports.
